Subject: Re: [RFC] Add PR_PREFIX to pr_xyz macros.
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Reply-To: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811121144400.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
References: <1226511327.23498.3.camel@localhost>
	 <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811121144400.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: IBM Corporation
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:59:02 +0100
Message-Id: <1226519942.2222.4.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1029
Lines: 37

On Wed, 2008-11-12 at 11:48 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> >
> > +#ifndef PR_PREFIX
> > +#define pr_fmt(format) format 
> > +#else
> > +#define pr_fmt(format) PR_PREFIX ": " format
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#define pr_emerg(fmt, ...) \
> > +        printk(KERN_EMERG pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> 
> So, why can't people just define their pr_fmt() macro directly, something 
> like
> 
> 	#define pr_fmt(fmt) \
> 		"%s:%d " fmt, __FILE__, __LINE__
> 
> which seems to be much more useful and generic than forcing them to use 
> "PR_PREFIX"?

Even better - much better. With that define a lot more printk wrappers
could be replaced. I'll come up with a patch.

-- 
blue skies,
  Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/